Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by s_henry_paulson | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

s_henry_paulson

Seems like he was betting $100 on altruism.

I have no idea how to feel after watching this video.

View on HN

Think of it this way.

What does Stephen Hawking get if he is wrong?

-$100 dollars

+Media coverage saying that he was wrong which promotes physics.

What does Stephen Hawking get if he is right?

+$100 dollars

+Media coverage saying that Stephen Hawking is right which promotes physics.

This is not altruism this is intelligent promotion of a topic that you want children and young adults to be educated in.

It is a paid advertisement for physics by a celebrity. Similar to athletes who get paid endorsements. It encourages people to challenge him. Using his celebrity status can inspire people into doing Physics, Math or Engineering. We need more scientists and engineers. Professor Hawking knows Physics but even better he knows how the play the media.

XKCD mentioned a similar idea a while back. http://xkcd.com/955/.

I wouldn't say altruism, more like an anarchist's expectation. It seems some people would've liked there to be no observation just to 'shake things up' and then have to move to a new model. Hawking does mention in the video that the greatest discoveries come from unexpected results. The Higgs Boson has been expected for decades.

When predictions come up as expected, it's no fun!

I'm a physicist, and I can predicting something then the measurement matching the prediction is freakin' awesome! I have loads of "amazing how well physics works" moments in the lab all the time.

Of course, when it doesn't, it's time for more theory, then more labs, which is fun as well indeed. It's a win-win.

Nope, he is just reminding every person on earth, and especially scientists, that science is not dogmatic, that there is no set stone, that to every Ptolemic theory we may hold, a Copernican view is waiting to be expounded.

Something I've wondered, presumably for several hundred years, Ptolemy's observations could be thought of as the standard model, and consistently day after day, year after year, the sun rose in the east and set in the west to 5 or 6 sigma etc.. that it could be said was proof he was correct. Ptolemy is often spoken in the pejorative, but for so long until the man from Krakow came along, how could you prove otherwise? Does this situation apply today and that a future "Copernicus" will turn the Higgs Boson on its head? Genuinely interested how a consistent set of findings which correspond to predictions, can really be said to prove a discovery?

"The Egyptians pride themselves on being the most ancient people in the world. In their authentic annals ... one may read that since they have been in existence, the course of the stars has changed direction four times, and that the sun has set twice in that part of the sky where it rises today."

But remember, his theory had huge holes, such as the movement of the planets. Newton's model, too, explained much more, but still not everything, and Einstein then helped fill that gap. It's not a case of Model A is 100% right but, look!, Model B is also 100% right and better. It's more like Model A is 97%, Model B 99.1%,...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com